Thursday, August 25, 2011

Conservatives and promiscuity

Conservatives are against the vaccine for the human papilloma virus (a cause of cervical cancer) because it would encourage promiscuity. In other words, sexual diseases are a punishment from the god(s) for premarital and extramarital sex. (The fact that married folks also get these diseases falls under the heading "the god(s) work in mysterious ways.")

Similarly, in their eyes AIDS is a punishment for homosexual sex.

Some conservatives even believe that pregnancy (outside of marriage) is itself a punishment for premarital and extramarital sex. Thus, use of condoms and other birth-control devices are, in their opinion, immoral because they diminish the risk of pregnancy out of wedlock, hence encourage promiscuous behavior.

Given that the vast majority of Americans commit the sin of premarital or extramarital intercourse at some time(s) in their lives, you would think that this kind of anti-human thinking would make these "conservatives" extremely unpopular. The very concept that disease and even pregnancy is a punishment for anything is so medieval that one wonders why holding this view isn't a major negative in elections.

3 comments:

There is a curiously "punishing" tendency in the political orientation of religious folks. This is curious from people who believe in a compassionate and forgiving god. One would think that they would be more god-like or at least more charitable. My friend, Michael Milburn has written about the psychological tendencies of the right in his book The Politics of Denial. It's certainly worth a read. The psychologists are way ahead of us political types at understanding these anomalies.

Also, do you mean "conservative" or do you mean "right-wing." The distinction is, I believe, significant, even though traditional journalists conflate the terms.

To my mind both are political philosophies. The historical origins of the terms not withstanding, I think of conservatives as people having a healthy skepticism toward change. Edmund Burke is often considered the first modern conservative. In modern usage, right wing does not rule out fascist critiques of society. True conservatives, and Churchill would be a great example, are strongly anti-fascist.

Perhaps the distinction is less useful than I suggested. There are few old fashioned conservatives on the scene today. The Tea Party and Republican primary voters are truly right wing, and that's one of the big problems with conventional politics today. Columnists David Brooks and David Frum are conservatives but neither of them speaks for the modern right. Rush Limbaugh, on the other hand, is no conservative but he is a prime spokesperson for the people running against Obama?

I guess that I feel that there is some cogency to positions taken by conservatives. Right-wingers, on the other hand, observe few logical constraints to their issue positions.